Advanced Process Control Strategy for a Condensate Stabilization Unit: Energy, Exergy, Economic, and Environmental (4E) Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study assesses the energy, exergy, economic, and environmental performance of a gas stabilization unit by employing a new strategy to implement an advanced control system. The advanced process control (APC) strategy is established based on the response surface methodology to assess the real-time performance of the process. The RSM-based APC technique targets the energy, exergy, economic, and environmental (4E) performance of the process in unsteady-state operations. A detailed sensitivity analysis is also conducted to evaluate the relative significance of operating parameters on the objective functions, such as exergy efficiency, energy cost, and CO 2 emission. The RSM-based APC strategy proposes an algorithm that can readily be implemented in the plant to increase the plant’s energy performance. Implementing this intelligent control system leads to the production of standard products, while production cost, energy consumption, exergy efficiency, and environmental impacts are enhanced. The exergy and sensitivity results indicate that the stabilization tower has the highest potential for process enhancement, and reboiler temperature is the most influential factor among operating parameters. Also, the RSM-based APC improves the exergy efficiency of the plant by 19% and reduces the energy cost by 13%. At the optimal state, 457 kg/h CO 2 emission is prevented.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".